Now this is something I didn't expect to see. AdAge, the influential advertising trade magazine, has a poll on their site asking whether the Democratic Party was right to cancel the Fox News debate. They also have coverage of the flap, which every PR and media buyer is going to see. Meanwhile, Mediabistro reports the following from Variety:
"The Congressional Black Caucus has given two of its four scheduled presidential debates to CNN but said it is 'in discussions' with Fox News to sponsor two as well," Variety reports. "The CBC is hosting two debates for Democratic presidential aspirants and two for Republicans for the 2008 cycle and had been seeking network sponsors to cover costs and broadcast the debates."Update: 11:47am: The Variety story originaly included this line: "Fox is working overtime to sponsor a debate between Democrats, seen as critical to maintaining its 'Fair and Balanced' mantra and credibly covering the 2008 election." It has been deleted.
Somebody got on the phone and yelled at Variety to delete that quote. I wonder why.
Could it have anything to do with this, from the State of the News Media 2007 from the Project for Excellence in Journalism*?
While the numbers are impressive -- particularly Fox News's financial milestones -- they do not come without questions. First, Fox News was expected to overtake CNN in profits in 2005 as well, but fell short, so the accuracy of projections remains a question. The second is more long-term. With all channels losing audience in 2006, has the cable industry as a whole -- beyond just news -- begun a downward curve?The number of cable households that are subscribers has barely increased in years, inching just 1% or so every year in the last five. With no new audience, advertisers aren't paying what they used to. Cable networks are no longer able to get the significantly higher rates they are accustomed to, and ended up with only a 2% gain in the 2006 advertising "upfront" period. In addition, the slowdown in advertising revenue and growth means each network or channel spends more on self-promotion to maintain its position.
In all likelihood, Fox News has a less profitable and less influential demographic base than CNN, which is why their larger audience isn't translating to higher profits. Their partisan branding problem is probably something that's always made them nervous and something they've always papered over with an aggressive 'Fair and Balanced' branding campaign (Air America, which is overt about its ideology, has trouble with advertisers). This is probably why Fox News is desperately trying to get the CBC to host a debate with them. They may succeed, as we have less leverage with the CBC Institute (though internal allies are fighting against Fox News). Regardless, the money people are noticing the animosity against Fox News, and realizing that the Fox News brand isn't necessarily something their clients should want to be associated with.
The corporate world is cautious about politics, and they don't like to get in the middle of political spats. They prefer their politics quiet and out of site. It's probably just better for them to put their ads on CNN and MSNBC, and leave Fox News for the penis pills and the like.
* I don't know why the Project for Excellence in Journalism includes Fox News or why they don't just start a new partisan press category.
|
|
|
Permalink :: 17 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.
